Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Indeed, iggy, that's why I linked to my post talking all about that later in the article. No way to know still means we simply don't know.
So I backed off some of my holdings yesterday when it was looking like 0.58 might be the very short-term high. That was 1/3 of my holdings, and now I'm seeing if it falls further before I buy back in. No sense in rushing, it seems.
I still think we're undervalued, but that doesn't give me a good rationale for trading stupid. If it does shoot up and I don't get the buying opportunity I want, well...looks like I might be needing a roof repair soon, so it won't be so bad to have some cash to take out.
All he said was that they basically can't say anything specific about milestones.
You are absolutely right. I'm rather excited to hear that they're continuing to follow the ADXS-PSA patients.
That is indeed interesting, if not entirely predictable. The fact that they're continuing to follow the ADXS-PSA patients is also a net positive, in my view. Signals at least a nominal interest from Merck, although I'm trying to hold back from getting too excited about it.
Some language from the PR that caught my eye, as well:
Based on discussions over the past several months with a number of experts in the field regarding our AIM2CERV trial, we have become increasingly optimistic about the prospects of this study.
Thanks for the clarity! I certainly hope to receive more guidance on all matters financial, since it's our biggest anchor by far. It would be a major boon to get some kind of direction.
What I hope we don't get is a Gary Rabin "WHEN we introduce our [new] partner..." line that doesn't end up being worth anything. Frustrating as it is, I want KB to act more than to talk.
Hey jck, aside from "discussions are underway," what guidance CAN they give on any potential partnerships.
Also, I am honestly surprised to see that they are continuing AIM2CERV. Makes me wonder how uncertain they are about cash after all, although your point of companies wanting interim data is well taken.
Indeed, late-breaking are usually accepted for a rather good reason.
If the terms for the agreement are not made public at the time of the announcement and SEC filings, then they were kept secret for a reason, and there is likely language restricting what information ADXS is allowed to control.
Hence why we haven't heard a peep about milestones.
Hence why we had to wait weeks for a PR on the NEO poster presentations
Hence the long wait times for any information at all about NEO. It all has to go through AMGN, which has its own bureaucratic processes that need to be cleared before any information can be divulged.
Again, I entreat you to tell me any other examples of a company doing what you propose. You appear to be resting on "ADXS is different from the other companies." Well, that may be true, but they're not going to be so wildly different that AMGN gives them free rein to all the information contained in their agreement.
However, I do agree with you that IF Berlin were to disclose such a large milestone payment, that would be a massive injection into the valuation of the company. I don't think there's any way in hell that they'll get 10% of the milestones for starting phase 1, as those payments are backloaded to reduce the risk to AMGN.
I provided a comparable for you, one that has an extremely bright, shining star, and they're sitting just shy of $5 billion. That's why I would cap it at this point.
Novocure is sitting at $3 billion, and they have legitimate potential to become a widely used alternate therapy modality.
Bater's statment implied that approval for Axal would bring us to this level of interest. That is not reasonable. He did not go into the neantigen pipeline, so neither did I. I already know it's undervalued.
You imply that not disclosing the milestones was a mistake, as opposed to a standard of the industry. Do you have eyes on other licensing deals that DID disclose those milestone arrangements?
Alright, $3+ billion is a similarly premium market cap, even with an Axal approval.
You need a $6.2 billion market cap to break even? Not even an Axal approval will get them there. Heck, a company like LOXO, with three slam dunk drugs, a $1 billion+ partnership, and an imminent approval isn't at $6.2 billion.
What gives you that impression?
I had similar feelings, but they announced that they were pulling the EU application. So stats on CMAs aren't going to be worth much anymore for Axal
I understand, but that article and the preparation for it is literally my job field. My company is similar to the one that makes OncLive, and I can tell you all but certainly that they had a focus (the program was probably funded by Sanofi), and the guide for the discussion included a small nod toward future directions for the sake of balance.
He's acknowledging that Axal exists and that he's heard of it. That's good news, but in no way does it support the assertion that Axal outperforms checkpoint inhibitors. This article only supports that immunotherapy is going to continue to be important.
Not in any context, in any way have the two been compared, though. We have absolutely no basis to make these assertions. And there are a lot of reasons for that, scientifically speaking.
Note that ADXS gets a cursory mention in this article. In no way does it support the claim that Axal outperforms checkpoint inhibitors.
It may well end up doing that, but the clinical trial data do not come close to supporting that assertion.
AXAL over time outperforms Checkpoint inhibitors
That's only true if you're selectively paying attention to what I've said. It's a great mark of shame to me that people may have read my Seeking Alpha articles and bought (and held) ADXS starting at various price points that I said should have been the bottom. Those optimistic takes have been wrong, and I regret if anyone took that advice and trusted me blindly.
Fact is, I've been recommending this stock for over a year, despite new low after new low. Even if I'm right in the end (I do, after all, continue to hold my shares), I have to live with the fact that there are people who trust what I write by buying shares. I am all for personal responsibility, but I'm not going to grift people into thinking that a company like ADXS has little to no risk. I care more about people who read what I write. I want other people to make decisions they're comfortable with. This requires that they have a complete understanding of what they're getting into. Posters who are completely negative or completely positive are not effective communicators of the complete picture with these biotechs.
Now if you want to maintain this tribalistic view that I'm either with you all the time or I'm against you all the time, that's fine. You keep on with that. But I'm not going to stop recommending caution with a stock like this, not as long as there is something worth being cautious about.
And boy howdy there is a good bit to be cautious about here. Case in point: we have no idea what this call is going to be about, and we have no good basis for assuming that it's about good news, just like we have no basis for assuming it's about bad news.
Milestone payment would be good news; hopefully it's bigger than I'm thinking it will likely be.
I, too, would like some clarity on the AXAL situation. It's quite up in the air, and I imagine it's contributing to a lot of the uncertainty surrounding ADXS right now. If there really is no road forward in cervical, then the market may view winding down AIM2CERV as a net positive thanks to decreased burn rate.
I highly doubt we hear about how they'll fund HOT, since it's either obvious (ADXS is paying for it), or it's something they can't divulge or even telegraph until the ink is dry (a partnership). My company was just bought out, and we weren't even allowed to discuss the freaking rumors around the office or look up Glassdoor reviews on the rumored acquiring company. Radio silence until the deal was done; it was bizarre, and it took something like a year.
Have I ever been wrong in expressing caution?
Why? Pretty much all of the news conferences for the last two years have been pretty benign, providing some light direction. They haven't given these big business updates to try and explain supremely bad news.
Why would they start now? We didn't get a business call after the clinical hold, or asking for a share increase, or with either of the two offerings this year.
This announcement signals nothing bad. And if you're really going to try and read the tea leaves on it, then explain why they would do it right in the middle of the trading day?
I hope you're right, but they're not going to remove the late-stage from this press release as a surreptitious announcement that they're shelving Axal.
Look at the GERN debacle. JNJ telegraphed all the way up to the negative continuation decision that they regarded imetelstat as a key pillar of their heme portfolio. Then suddenly it wasn't anymore. That's how these companies operate; they're not going to put bread crumbs out there for observant shareholders to read.
I certainly hope it's something more than that. It would beat the long drought we've had.
This news is neither good nor bad. It's literally announcing that they're going to talk to us. Can you name another time in the last two years where that has portended anything at all?
I'm not saying or implying that it's bad news at all, just that we almost never learn anything new from these calls, and that they're usually just a recitation of the key results from the quarterly filing, which we are due to hear about.
If this announcement is a prelude to outstanding news, then great. But this kind of news has never preceded something strong. No one should be scared of this call. No one should be overly excited about it, either.
Case in point, if the stock spikes today, I don't see it as a good time to buy, necessarily, except for the fact that I continue to think that the share price is being unjustly suppressed.
Seems likely to be a quarterly release, rather than a harbinger of straight-out bad news like that. I don't think we see a request to authorize more shares before around Feb-Mar, assuming it happens at all.
Ah, ok cool. So I'm just slow on the draw today. Hopefully there will be good news, but I imagine it will be mostly a "staying the course" boilerplate message.
Where is he going to speak? Or do you mean you're speculating? I had not heard an announcement from the company.
Since it's a veterinary approval, I'll plead total ignorance. In humans, usually the company already has the confirmatory trial on its way when the conditional approval is granted (that's often one of the conditions), and you end up about 1 or 2 years out. For example, blinatumomab took from November 2015 to July 2017 to go from conditional to full approval.
Since it's a veterinary approval, I'll plead total ignorance. In humans, usually the company already has the confirmatory trial on its way when the conditional approval is granted (that's often one of the conditions), and you end up about 1 or 2 years out. For example, blinatumomab took from November 2015 to July 2017 to go from conditional to full approval.
Well they have been talking about it recently in their presentations. It does, after all, justify the continued development of ADXS-HER2, if nothing else.
Financially, it's probably just not something that will make a big dent, so there's not too much reason to highlight it beyond "we have this partnership; it has been successful."
Still, it's yet another thing that the market is ignoring about ADXS.
This is absolutely not true. What's the point of spreading lies?
I continue to agree that we're at artificially depressed lows, but I would be surprised to hear that institutions are buying at these levels, given that they don't typically dabble in penny stocks, which we unfortunately are (at least for now).
I don't think I would count on institutional investors to come and pull us out of this fire
And they had...what, 54 patients in the data update? It will be interesting to see how far along ADXS has managed to come with enrollment.
Unfortunately, it does seem like ADXS has more technical hurdles, so I won't be surprised to see enrollment be a lot smaller
Oh yes, for sure. But Berlin's emergence was the first time we heard that the program might be shelved, so it's possible that no negotiations were ongoing at the time of his hire.
I may be wrong about a deal not being imminent (definitely hope I am), but a big deal is not likely going to get done in 6 months.
If they've had more like 10 months to get the ball rolling, then good; hopefully that means we're closer.
6 months is not enough time to lock down any kind of significant partnership, unless that ball was already rolling. So I would not say we are stretching the limits for “reasonable” timing to make a decision on this.
Certainly their cash is stretched, so we are all very anxious!
A couple of months ago they were at about the same market cap as ADXS.
Share price means absolutely nothing when comparing two different companies with different capital structures.
I did email him after he was announced as CEO, wishing him good luck and all those pleasantries. He replied back a little bit later with reciprocation of the pleasantries. That was it. I would speak with him if given the chance, but that certainly has not presented itself yet, and I don't imagine there's much incentive for him to bother with a SA author.
Not yet